# Proton vs. Neutron

According to TOEBI, both protons and neutrons consist of three plain vanilla electrons. As we know protons and neutrons behave differently if we put them into a magnetic field. In this post we go through some properties and differences between protons and neutrons.

First of all, both particles have approximately the same mass, $1.67262178*10^{-27}$ kg for proton and $1.67492735*10^{-27}$ kg for neutron. Why neutron is a bit heavier than proton if both are constructed by three electrons? What reduces neutron's charge? These two questions might have the same answer.

Let's start from the basics. How three electrons manage to stay together when they normally would repel each other away? Obviously something prevents the expected behaviour and most likely it's the FTE density outside the three electrons, at least it's difficult to invent anything else compatible with TOEBI ideas. It means that the FTE density in between the electrons must be lower than the outer density because if it were higher, the density would prevent the stable system. Just like a nucleus generates high enough FTE density which blocks electrons from crashing into it.

According to previously described mechanism those three electrons experience acceleration outwards their system, but the higher outer FTE density prevents them from escaping the system, hence protons and neutrons are stable. Well, neutrons are stable only in nucleus and also that phenomenon needs an explanation.

What kind of setups those three electrons can possess inside proton or neutron? Based on proton and neutron behaviour in a magnetic field there is two possible setups, either they all have the parallel spinning vector orientations (u-u-u) or one of the electrons has antiparallel spinning vector orientation compared to others (u-u-d). How come? Well, the spinning vectors can't be at random orientations because protons' and neutrons' consistent behaviour in a magnetic field. Ok then, which setup belongs to proton and which one to neutron? Neutrons react in lesser extend to a magnetic field than protons, that's a clue... In TOEBI, the only reasonable mechanism explaining that would be that neutrons have two electrons with parallel spinning vector orientations and one electron with antiparallel spinning vector orientation (u-u-d). Such a setup would reduce neutron's reactivity in a magnetic field (e.g. $g$-factor). One electron works against the other two which leads to the observed reduced charge of neutron.

How do these two different electron spinning vector orientation setups affect proton and neutron mass? What exactly is particle mass? In TOEBI papers I have defined mass as being the cross section of a particle. But that's not the whole truth, also the amount of FTEPs contained around the particle matters, it must matter. If we take a look at for example muon and tau particles, both of them have an underlying electron at their core surrounded by a larger amount of FTEPs than in case of electron, hence muon and tau have the bigger mass than electron. However, those heavier versions of electrons lose their excess FTEPs pretty quickly according to their decay patterns. The bottom line is that the particle mass includes also those FTEPs associated with the particle (spherical object having the boundary where background FTE density equals the lowest FTE density of the particle).

Back to the differences between proton and neutron. Does the electron spinning vector orientation setup of neutron (u-u-d) generate the bigger mass ( = more FTEPs contained) than proton's setup (u-u-u)? If so, why? Observably the electron spinning vector orientation setup of neutron generate bigger mass than of proton's.

The reason for neutron's bigger mass must be related to the larger distances between neutron's inner electrons which is due to lower FTE density in between the electrons compared to proton's. Proton's three electrons have a parallel spinning vector orientation which generates higher inner FTE density than neutron's three electrons (u-u-d). Proton's higher inner FTE density means that the density difference between the inner and outer volume is smaller than of neutron's which leads to the smaller acceleration for those three electrons, hence the smaller distances between proton's electrons.

Neutron's a bit larger volume compared to proton's is due to a bit larger distances between the inner electrons. How much is the difference? Unfortunately I haven't developed TOEBI further enough in order to answer that. Nevertheless, above description is TOEBI's view on proton and neutron.

What makes neutron decay when out of atom nucleus? Why can't neutron and electron create an atom? I think those questions deserve the blog post of their own!

Greetings from Lapland! Conditions for viewing planets and other targets in nightly sky were excellent. Light pollution was minimal and on couple of nights the sky was crystal clear and seeing was great. It was just perfect!

# FQXi Essay Contest - Spring, 2015

Once again FQXi Community put up an essay contest, this time with theme Trick or Truth: the Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics. I have pondered the issue previously so I decided to participate the contest. My essay, "Mathematics, Physics and Nature" looks at the connection through TOEBI glasses and hopefully it receives constructive and interested feedback from the other contestants. In couple of days my essay will be visible and also you can participate the conversation in FQXi's contest forum.

So, what's my essay all about? As you probably already know, Force Transfer Ether (FTE) plays a huge role in TOEBI. FTE enables particle interactions and its density affects the magnitude of interactions as well as the rate of measured time. I tried to put all the interesting and relevant information regarding FTE into the essay but in reality an accurate explanation and coverage would require a series of books and tons of additional work.

Writing my essay explains partially the recent silence in TOEBI blog and I also recently purchased Celestron Omni XLT 127 telescope... needless to say, fooling around with quality telescope consumes enormous amounts of time. Luckily it's a hobby for whole family!

# Status Report

It's about time to make a status report... What's going on? What will happen?

Nothing big is happening. My CERN contact is working but I haven't heard any news so far. We'll see... I haven't got any extra time for TOEBI development. It's hard to make a progress when most of my time goes into other activities. This can't go like this, I need a sponsor (governmental, foundation, private person or private company) who is willing to gamble with my antimatter idea. Positive outcome would guarantee adequate funding for TOEBI development, that's for sure.

I'm going to focus, at least for now, on hunting such a sponsor. General development of TOEBI can wait, I have nothing to win from that activity. All the rest available time goes into developing experiments related to my antimatter idea. So it might be that my activity in TOEBI blog goes down, at least temporarily.

# The Mechanism

What makes particles accelerate, either repulsively or attractively, towards gravitating objects or in interactions between charged particles? Even though TOEBI has the law for the acceleration between charged electron based particles I haven't really understood what is the exact mechanism behind the acceleration. Now I understand it and it's actually so simple and beautiful than one can think of.

The simplest scenario is the pure gravitational interaction between a larger mass and particle. FTE density generated by the larger mass gradually gets smaller and smaller according the distance between the center of the larger mass and the particle. There is also this minuscule FTE density difference between the side facing the center of the larger mass and the opposite side of the particle.

How FTE density affects the FTEP dynamics surrounding spinning particles? Higher the density then more difficult it's for particle to suck FTEPs through its spinning vector poles, because surrounding higher FTE density slows down the incoming FTEP flow near the surface of the particle. In case of the gravitating larger mass, the same mechanism is also present, but this time the effect is located on the side facing the larger mass. Particle's spinning vector orientation doesn't matter in this phenomenon.

Obviously now the incoming FTEP flux flows and spreads more freely to everywhere else compared to the side facing the gravitating mass and this mechanism pushes the particle towards the larger mass. The same mechanism applies, but in much greater magnitude, when two charged particles interact (because both particles have the huge spinning frequency $f_{e}$).

Particles' spinning vector orientations are very relevant because the generated FTEP flux handedness. Two electrons with parallel spinning vectors eject FTEPs between them which causes a huge increase (compared to the gravitating case) in local FTE density next to both electrons on the side facing the other electron. Now the incoming FTEP flux flows much more freely to the other side of the particles.

The same mechanism is also in action when electrons' spinning vectors are antiparallel and particles are pushed away. How come? Antiparallel spinning vectors won't accumulate FTEPs in between the electrons, quite contrary, meaning that the FTE density is actually decreased between the particles (compared to the other side of the particles). So this time the incoming FTEP flux flows much more freely to the side facing the other particle, hence the repulsive force.

Things are going to get even better... I'll continue this post later. Berry and Yop, you should sit down while reading the upcoming text...  just to make sure you guys won't fall on the floor and hurt yourselves.

Here's a picture (I was drawing with my kids and got an idea) describing how spinning electron generates a bubble of FTEPs around itself. I thought one picture would tell more than thousand words...

Update: Actually ferrite magnets have a lot less iron and unpaired electrons than in the calculation below. That would reduce the calculated force too.

Let's say that we have a large, homogeneous magnetic field in classical sense.
The easiest way to create such a magnetic field is by putting two symmetrical
magnetic poles face each other with a gap between them.

If we look at the setup from TOEBI point of view we realize that electron spinning vectors are parallel on both poles. Obviously, if we want attractive force between the poles those electron spinning vectors have to be parallel according Second law of TOEBI.

Let's say that we have two cylinder shape iron magnets with dimensions $r=0.5$ cm and $h=0.5$ cm having their magnetic axis along their height. Based on their volume and iron density we can say that each magnet is made of $\approx 3.334*10^{22}$ iron atoms. So in the ideal case we would have $n\approx1.33*10^{23}$ unpaired electrons per magnet participating in generating the magnetic field.

In theory, we can calculate the force between the two attached magnets by calculating the force (by second law of TOEBI) between their center of masses with given number of unpaired electrons.

where $d=0.5$ cm is the distance between the center of masses. In practice, due to differently orientated magnetic domains and blocking caused by magnet's atoms gained force won't be as high as calculated theoretical value. Generated force could hold $\approx$1.8 kg object in the air, more realistic amount would be $\approx$0.18 kg or something like that.

# Deceiving Phenomenon

As usually, an incomplete knowledge and view about all the influencing factors involved in any given situation can lead people, and yes, physicists are people too, into the wrong direction. Unfortunately, physics community has travelled into the wrong direction for awfully long time. I'm talking about magnetic fields and free particles interacting with them.

If we have an electron entering a magnetic field it will always (according to TOEBI) change its spinning vector antiparallel to the electrons it encounters during its entrance. Due to the presence of numerous unpaired magnet's electrons which have pretty much the same spinning vector orientations locally the test electron's spinning vector starts rotating on a plane (almost every time to the same direction). Underlying mechanism for the spinning vector rotating is the FTEP flux handedness from numerous magnet's electrons interacting with the test electron's FTEP flux, which also has handedness.

No matter what we'll encounter the same phenomenon. Actually this spinning vector rotation frequency on a plane is measured and it depends on the amount of involved electrons in the magnets (more involved electrons in the magnets means more powerful the generated magnetic field). Spinning vector rotation frequency in a magnetic field is called Larmor frequency by contemporary physics.

Always when we put electrons into a magnetic field they'll behave as described above, I mean almost always. There might be some special ways to inject an electron into a magnetic field so that it actually manage to gain the opposite spinning vector rotation direction, but that's irrelevant at the moment. How about the situation where we manage to trigger a particle pair production (electron-"positron") in a magnetic field? Just like in many everyday particle collision experiments. I mean, in TOEBI world, those two are just two plain vanilla electrons with antiparallel spinning vectors. What contemporary physicists see happening at the event?

They'll see that those two particles behave differently in the magnetic field. What conclusion can be drawn from the observation? Obviously something is different with these two particles, right? Contemporary physicists decided to call that other oddly behaving electron as electron's antiparticle (positron), just like Dirac had predicted. That's a huge mistake if you ask me, albeit very understandable.

The real reason why "positron" behaves differently in that magnetic field is because it was created in it, with its twin electron. It can't change its spinning vector orientation freely as needed in order to behave like a normal electron, the presence of its twin electron prevents it initially, just the amount of time needed to define "positron's" spinning vector rotation direction in that magnetic field. In reality, that "positron" is just plain vanilla electron with the opposite (to its twin electron) spinning vector rotation direction in that magnetic field. No positrons, just plain vanilla electrons.

That was the qualitative description how "positrons" are created and how one phenomenon deceived generations of physicists, every one of them. Can we fix the damage done over the years? In principle yes, in practise no. Even exclusive experiment covering the phenomenon won't change a thing, it probably will be ignored to the point when first antimatter experiment by TOEBI are conducted. You can't argue with those antimatter experiments that's for sure.

# Watch Out The Curve

I wanted to start a new category, Apocalypse (a.k.a. Gamma Ray Burst = GRB), in TOEBI blog. After all, the apocalypse is pretty much the outcome from our current scientific path. No matter what, and I mean even without my humble contribution, mainstream physics will finally, say in few years or decades, find the truth about "antimatter". Yeah, that's right, the truth what I have preached about for a couple of years now.

But why blame science or specifically physics about it? It's up to us how we use scientific discoveries, right? Sure, to some point that's true. The problem is that the development in sciences in getting faster and faster. Good example is written down by Tim Urban in Wait But Why, in where artificial intelligence is seen as the player in the end game. Same applies in physics... the next big thing in physics (curve) is the discovery of the true nature of "antimatter" and it's going to be a true black swan.

After we have discovered the true nature of "antimatter" we can't undo it. We have to live with it, from the point of discovery to our GRB event. We don't have almost any chances escaping the event. How come? With the help of antimatter based technology we could design and build a new type of space vehicles which carries us away from the future GRB! Unfortunately getting far enough in order to be at safe from the event takes just too much time. As we can see, GRB is pretty effective mechanism for the great filter.

Surely there must be some way for avoiding the event? You tell me.

Update: Actually I came up with one possibility. We might manage to reach the nearest solar system in time and hide there behind some planet so that the possible GRB won't cause any harm on people on board.

# Electron in Magnetic Field

This post is inspired by Berry's challenge...

So let's have a magnetic field of 0.1 T in z-direction and an electron with $\vec f$ aligned in x-direction and a velociy of 100 m/s in x-direction. What happens according to TOEBI?

How does it play out in TOEBI? Let's assume that the magnetic field is homogeneous and constructed with two opposite magnetic poles where electron density is constant (electrons/area). First of all, unit Tesla is defined by mainstream physics without the knowledge of the underlying mechanism which generates electric and magnetic fields. Therefore our first task is to solve the amount of electrons in magnetic poles which would generate the effect of 0.1 T. We already know how such a homogeneous magnetic field is constructed, we need to have our electrons (in the magnetic poles) in a symmetric spinning vector pattern around the center of the pole (CoP). Every electron has its spinning vector aligned with the pole's surface and perpendicular to the direction of CoP and neighboring electrons' spinning vectors are parallel (see picture).

How big force 0.1 T field would generate on our moving charge? Mainstream unit (T) requires mainstream equation, hence

so the radius for generated circle would be

and we do know that single electron changes its spinning vector orientation antiparallel to the spinning vectors on its trajectory. Electrons in magnetic poles can't change their spinning vector orientations (too easily) due to their interactions with the surrounding material (magnet's material).

The question goes, how many electrons is needed to keep the electron in the track where $r$ is known? First observations is that the electron must experience attractive net force towards the CoP and part of the attractive force is generated by the electrons on the other half of the circle. On top of those electrons, also the electrons on the right hand side of the electron's path generate repulsive force pushing the electron towards the CoP. Net attractive force overcomes also the repulsive force generated by the electrons between the electron and the CoP.

*** Removed the calculation for now

Updating...

Above would hold if the electron between the poles wouldn't change its spinning vector orientation in relation to the CoP, however, it does change it because it's moving. Surrounding FTE density is pretty much the same in radial dimension, hence the electron is free to change its spinning vector orientation perpendicular to its velocity during the time when the electron is between adjacent orbital electrons in the poles. The amount of spinning vector orientation change depends on the velocity of the electron, slower it moves more it's capable of changing the orientation, hence lesser the force towards the CoP.

If the electron doesn't move at all it will find itself between the adjacent orbital electrons having its spinning vector aligned with the pole radius.

More updating...

Finally I realized what's going on in the gap between the poles. Also I realized that I had a wrong idea about how particles behave during motion. Now I have updated Introduction to TOEBI paper accordingly. I'll re-write this post in future.

# Merry Christmas!

It's time to relax and have fun with your loved ones... and hopefully put some extra effort to TOEBI development. I didn't reach the goal set by Berry within one week, but I got closer (see updated Introduction paper). I'll keep on working towards the goal during my holidays.

Have Fun!

# Three Free Electrons

Let's get this conundrum clear now. How do they behave in various setups. Our basic assumption is that these three free electrons are in equilateral triangle shape so that the distance between any two electrons is the same.

Major update starts

Let's assume that the initial distance between the electrons is large enough for not disturbing the wave pattern generated by these electrons (at least not too much), so that second law is applicaple. Now we can describe quolitative what happens. After more detailed description of repulsive force we are able to do quantitative predictions regarding the timing and trajectories.

Electrons having parallel spinning vectors experience attractive force towards each other as stated by second law and they start moving towards the center of the system. FTE density between electrons ncreases to the point where electrons' trajectories are reversed. Build up repulsive potential energy does the job. If one of the electrons had antiparallel spinning vector orientation at begin with then things would progress differently. Now the electron with antiparallel spinning vector starts immediately generate repulsive force towards the other two. At the same time those two electrons with parallel spinning vectors attracts each other to the point where repulsion kicks in.

In principle it should be possible to measure the different electron behaviour between this setup and the setup where all spinning vectors were parallel. All we need to measure is if all these electrons hit symmetrically (and with proper distances) set up measuring devices at the same time. In case of all spinning vectors parallel, electrons should hit the measuring devices at the same time but in the other case one electron (antiparallel one) should hit the measuring device before the other two. Those other two electrons have to travel an additional distance before they start experience the repulsive force.

Major update ends (text below is wrong)

1. Scenario

All spinning vectors are parallel. The key player is the bottom electron which has FTEP flux which ejects FTEPs from underneath itself towards the other two (for more information check out subsection Two Electron Based Particles from Introduction to Theory of Everything by Illusion). This electron (electron B) starts to change its spinning vector orientation after the other two. But which one of these other two electrons starts the spinning orientation changing? Again, the surrounding FTE density dictates the order. The one which is closer to Earth's center of mass (electron C) generates denser FTEP flux (*), hence will be the anchor for the other electron. So, the spinning vector changing order would be, top electron, down electron and the original anchor electron. This order is also the order for electrons leaving the scene.

(*) If the triangle is top down, then the upper electron which ejects FTEPs from underneath of itself towards the other upper electron will be the anchor for the other upper electron. In the picture right it would electron A.

2. Scenario

There is two parallel spinning vectors (electrons A and B) and one antiparallel (electron C). This one is easy. Based on TL2 those antiparallel spinning vectors (B and C) generate repulsive force which triggers the movement for those electrons.

That single antiparallel electrons experiences the repulsion first and after that, electron A changes its spinning vector, which leads to repulsion between electrons A and B. At the same time electrons A and B are travelling away from electron C.

Again surrounding FTE ordered which electron changes its spinning vector orientation. Momentum will be conserved (the sum of momentum vectors is zero).

3. Scenario

Random spinning orientations (I'll write this later)